Skip to main content

Security report for mpirical-lms.com

Mpirical · Education · N/a

Medium risk. 4 critical or high findings in Security headers and GDPR outside view.

Security score

60/100

Risk levelMedium

0–100, higher is better. How it is calculated

Mpirical LMS is an educational technology platform providing a Moodle-based learning management system primarily targeting educational institutions and learners. The platform integrates Microsoft 365 for user authentication and incorporates video content via Vimeo, indicating a focus on multimedia learning experiences. The business operates a niche SaaS model within the education sector, with a relatively small scale and basic public-facing content. Technically, the website is built on Moodle with YUI JavaScript libraries and uses OAuth2 for authentication. However, the site suffers from significant performance issues with a slow load time and lacks modern SEO and accessibility optimizations. The absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS implementation is a critical security flaw, exposing users to potential data interception risks. The site also lacks essential security headers and cookie consent mechanisms, which further weakens its security posture and privacy compliance. From a security perspective, the platform shows minimal adherence to best practices. The lack of HTTPS, no HSTS, no DNSSEC, and missing DMARC reporting emails are notable vulnerabilities. No incident response or security policy information is publicly available, and no certifications or vulnerability disclosure policies are evident. These gaps present risks to user data protection and regulatory compliance. Overall, the website's risk profile is elevated due to poor security configurations and slow performance. Strategic improvements in SSL deployment, security headers, privacy compliance, and performance optimization are recommended to enhance trustworthiness and protect user data effectively.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
43/ 100 · High
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

  1. (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
  2. (b) Incident handling: One indicator
  3. (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
  4. (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
  5. (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
  6. (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
  7. (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
  8. (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
  9. (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
  10. (j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside

This scan rated NIS2 with an earlier keyword method that is no longer shown; rescan for the per-article view. Risk management, continuity, supply chain, training, MFA, management oversight (Art. 20) and incident reporting (Art. 23) need internal evidence, and Guard cannot tell whether NIS2 applies to this organisation.

GDPR is indicative only, based on publicly visible signals: Articles 7, 12, 13 and 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive. Not a certification or legal assessment.

Priority findings

4 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Security headers

    Security headers are instructions your web server sends to every visitor’s browser. Missing ones leave visitors more exposed to attacks such as clickjacking and injected scripts.

    • High

      Missing Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • High

      Missing Content-Security-Policy header

      Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

      What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application

      • ASVS V3.4.3
      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self'; form-action 'self'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none';…

  2. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • High

      No Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching mpirical-lms.com

This scan found 17 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

  • TLS certificates and expiry
  • DNS records
  • SPF, DKIM and DMARC
  • Security headers
  • GDPR and NIS2 posture
  • Exposed services
  • Third-party trackers
  • Security score drift

Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. See sample alerts.

Full report

€39.90one-time

  • The complete analysis as a PDF you can cite
  • Email delivery with an unlock code
  • Lifetime access to this report

Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.

Results by check

Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.

How this score is calculated

The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.

Counted in this score

SSL/TLS
50
Security headers
30
Email security
50
DNS health
85
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
43
Average
60

Not counted

  • NIS2 outside view: Re-weights evidence from the TLS, email, DNS, network and hygiene checks, so counting it would count that evidence twice. Shown on its own.
  • OffSeq Observations: An AI reading of the site, useful context but not reproducible evidence. Shown on its own.

Findings that cap the score at 49

Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.

  • The certificate is not trusted by browsers
  • The website is not served over HTTPS
  • A database, remote desktop, file-sharing or Telnet service is reachable from the internet
  • The page loads a script from a compromised source
  • The domain registration has expired
  • SPF authorises every server to send mail as the domain

Partial scans

When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.

Risk levels

  • Critical0–25
  • High26–49
  • Medium50–75
  • Low76–100

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

Mpirical LMS positions itself as a specialized educational technology provider leveraging Moodle to deliver learning management services. Its integration with Microsoft 365 suggests targeting enterprise or institutional clients familiar with Microsoft ecosystems. The business model centers on SaaS delivery of LMS capabilities, with revenue likely derived from subscriptions or licensing. The lack of extensive public content and limited contact information indicates a focus on existing clients or controlled user access. The partnership with mpirical.com for corporate information suggests a broader organizational structure. Growth opportunities may lie in improving digital maturity and expanding service offerings. However, current technical and security shortcomings could hinder market competitiveness and client trust.

Security posture

The security posture of the Mpirical LMS website is weak due to the absence of a valid SSL certificate and HTTPS enforcement, which is a critical vulnerability for any platform handling user credentials. The lack of security headers and missing DNSSEC and DMARC configurations further expose the site to potential attacks such as man-in-the-middle, DNS spoofing, and email spoofing. No public security policies or incident response contacts are available, indicating limited transparency and preparedness. While no known SSL vulnerabilities or vulnerable libraries were detected, the fundamental lack of HTTPS severely undermines overall security. Immediate remediation is necessary to protect user data and comply with privacy regulations.

Recommendations

  1. Obtain and properly configure a valid SSL/TLS certificate to enable HTTPS across the entire site.
  2. Implement HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS) with includeSubDomains and preload directives.
  3. Add essential security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options.
  4. Establish and publish a clear security policy and incident response contact information.
  5. Introduce a cookie consent mechanism compliant with GDPR and other privacy regulations.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on the Moodle platform using YUI JavaScript libraries and integrates third-party services like Vimeo for video playback and Microsoft 365 for OAuth2 authentication. The DNS setup uses custom nameservers under razorblue.com but lacks DNSSEC and CAA records. The SSL configuration is invalid, with no TLS protocols enabled and no cipher suites available, indicating no HTTPS support. Performance is poor with a high load time and large page size. SEO is minimal with only basic meta keywords and no Open Graph or structured data. Accessibility and mobile optimization are basic, with some responsive design elements but no advanced features. The technical debt includes outdated libraries and missing modern security and performance best practices.
Standards and sources

Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with mpirical-lms.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

We’ll email you to confirm your review and keep your details private.

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review mpirical-lms.com.

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

We only use your feedback to improve Guard reports. Contact details are never shared.